Biden Admin Caught In INSANE LIE That trump Let Chinese Spy Balloons Over US, Top Officials Say NOPE
John Ratcliffe pointed out simply that no person, no photographer, no pilots, not a single person ever complained of or talked about this. The Biden administration is claiming to have just discovered that this happened.
The shocking and hilariously lie is still traveling liberal twitter as democrats desperately want to believe its true
#democrats
#trump
#biden
Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
After news broke of that Chinese spy balloon flying over the U.S., an anonymous official claimed Trump let it happen three times.
Then when the Trump officials come out and say actually that never happened, no one ever saw it, there's no evidence it happened, the Biden admin is now claiming they actually just discovered it.
Surprise, surprise.
Yeah, I'm calling BS.
They got caught in a lie, because government officials in the know say, nope.
In our next story, the Grammys.
Satanic imagery.
Yeah, but no one watches the Grammys anymore, and everybody tries to be edgy, but let's talk about the deeper implications of the non-binary status and trans status of the individual when they gave a standing ovation to an individual for getting trans surgery as a minor.
And our next story, death tourism is now coming to the U.S.
and a slippery slope.
In Canada, they will literally kill you, the government will, for being mentally ill and nothing else.
It just gets worse from there if we keep letting this happen.
If you like the show, give us a good review and leave us five stars.
Share the show with your friends.
Now, let's get into that first story.
The memes were all over the place.
And we were wondering why the balloon wasn't shot down.
Like, immediately.
So I walk into the green room at the studio.
Jack Posobiec is standing there.
For those of you not familiar, conservative commentator.
I think most of you know who he is.
And he's like, yo, did you hear about this?
And I'm like, hear about what?
The Chinese spy balloon flying over Montana?
And I was like, wait, what?
I've been eating and working out.
I've been out of the news for the past couple hours.
Apparently, very simply, people looked up and saw a balloon.
You could see it in the sky.
A lot of people were upset that it didn't get shot down right away, but eventually it did get shot down over the Carolinas, if you've been paying attention.
That means this balloon flew over the whole country and people were roasting the Biden administration.
Well, we said on TimCast IRL, under Donald Trump, he would have shot that thing down.
More importantly, the balloons never would have come.
And the big news that we'll go through now is what happened with the balloon being shot down.
But the new report that came out that, get this, three balloons flew over the U.S.
while Donald Trump was president.
Chinese spy balloons, of course.
But, uh, I'm gonna go ahead and say that's an insane lie.
Several different former government officials have come out and said this is not true.
And the reason why I say it's an insane lie is that John Ratcliffe, the former director of national intelligence, not only said it's not true, but he said, can you remember any time when people looked up into the sky and saw a balloon, a Chinese spy balloon, and said, what is that?
Because that's how we got this story in the first place.
You can see the balloon.
Someone saw it and posted it online and said, what's going on?
Everyone then said, hey, look at this.
It's got a tech package on it.
It's like, now they're reporting it may actually have explosives on it.
So it could self-detonate.
But get this.
What they're arguing, CNN and a bunch of media outlets are arguing that the Biden admin just discovered this happened.
Okay, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
So, under Donald Trump, nobody sees anything.
Then, when everyone starts ragging on Biden, they come out and they go, well, actually, under Trump, there were three balloons.
It's like, huh?
And then, when Trump's people come out and they say, this is not true, what's the response?
Actually, we just discovered them.
And now, the Biden administration is offering to brief Donald Trump's people on the three times balloons flew over the U.S.
from China and we never noticed.
Forgive me if I just don't believe you.
And I think, with three former government officials coming out saying it's not true, you have been caught in an insane lie.
You have no evidence to back it up.
Nobody saw it happen.
There's no record of it until now when you just discovered it.
And three former officials said, sorry, not true.
We even got TMZ reporting on this.
That's how insane this stuff is.
And I'll tell you what's really going on.
The real concern?
We've got reports that apparently Russia and Ukraine wanted a ceasefire, wanted to end the war, and the U.S.
said no.
We've got more reports coming.
Well, I got one story about the zombification of this country and everything falling apart.
It's horrifying.
And, from the Washington Post, people are not feeling what Joe Biden is doing.
Meaning, like, there's supposed to be good things happening, but ain't nobody's feeling it.
Egg prices are through the roof.
It's supposed to sound good, but for some reason people are still saying, look, man, it just isn't.
The media can report whatever they want, but we know it's always a lie.
When I first heard the story that three balloons flew over the U.S.
and I see all these liberals start hooting, going, Donald Trump!
Donald Trump!
I said, wow, you know, we were wrong about this one.
You know, we jumped the gun.
You know what I'm going to do?
I'm going to issue a corrective tweet and say, on TimCast IRL, we said that Donald Trump wouldn't allow it or he'd shoot it down, and boy, were we wrong.
And then I stopped it.
Let's not be silly.
Someone tweeted at me and said, give it the old Bongino 72.
That is, Dan Bongino says, wait 72 hours and the story will be debunked.
And so I was like, you know what?
I was playing poker all weekend.
It was fun.
I'm just going to wait it out and not talk about it.
And then sure enough, I look at my phone and there it is.
Refutation from three former government officials.
And I'm like, I knew it.
It came from some media guy, an anonymous source.
And then it was refuted by government officials.
Now look, by all means, anybody could be lying here.
Trump's people could be lying, Biden could be lying, but I just gotta say, we can see the balloon!
You can see it in the sky!
Didn't happen under Trump.
It's just all lies, man.
Alright, let's break down exactly what's going on in this story.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com, become a member if you are not one already.
Click that Join Us button if you would like to support videos like this, the work that I do, and the work we do at TimCast as a whole.
Coffee Shop is currently underway.
Freedomistan, New Skate Show, Morning Show, it is all underway.
We've got a big year planned.
Just, we gotta get this building done for the expansion, and then we're gonna set up a morning show.
With your support, we will make cultural forces that will spread individual responsibility, meritocracy, liberty, and You know, what I would say is strong family values, traditional values, but not like overtly.
You know, just kind of like regular old normal people.
That's the goal.
None of this weird Grammy Satan stuff.
No, I'm not all about that.
We're gonna do Saturday morning cartoons at the coffee shop where people can hang out, have breakfast, and watch good family-friendly entertainment people can meet, and cultural spaces where we can share ideas and become stronger as a community.
If you like that, smash the like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show, share this video right now with your friends.
Let's jump into the story from our friends over at TMZ.
Here we go.
TMZ says Chinese balloon.
Ex-Trump officials refute DOD claim three had flown here before.
The Chinese spy balloon is down, but questions remain.
Like whether this has happened on another president's watch, with the DOD saying it did, pointing to Trump.
Here's the deal.
The DoD issued a lengthy statement Saturday explaining what exactly happened leading up to an F-22 fighter jet of ours safely shooting down the balloon over the Atlantic Ocean, just outside of Surfside Beach, South Carolina.
We all remember that, yes?
Sure.
They reiterated what everyone had already heard at that point, that the U.S.
believes the balloon had been purposefully sent here by China.
However, in explaining the balloon posed no serious threat to us, other than breaching
our airspace, pushing the boundaries of our sovereignty, the DoD goes on to cite an unnamed
defense official who claims this happened before.
Really.
Unnamed.
Lies.
The balloon did not pose a military or physical threat.
Still, its intrusion into American airspace over several days was an unacceptable violation of U.S.
sovereignty.
Was an unacceptable.
The official said Chinese balloons briefly transited the continental United States at least three times during the prior administration.
Why would they say that at all?
Oh, and by the way, we want to freak you out by adding this.
No, that is a lie.
And I'm not buying it.
It's always lies, right?
The anonymous official says, Chinese balloons, blah, we wear that, yeah.
There's no other details about when exactly this might have happened or to what degree, namely, did they do full flyovers?
In the wake of this Department of Defense official getting Trump's name in the mix, a handful of former Trump administration officials have come out of the woodwork to deny this ever happened during his time in office.
And we're talking heavy hitters, guys who'd know.
Take a look at this.
The former Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe.
Fine.
I'm gonna say this right now to all the liberals.
You think it's a conspiracy?
I'll tell you this.
An anonymous official is not evidence.
If three former officials, Pompeo, Esper, and Ratcliffe, all came out and said it never happened, are you arguing the government conspired to lie to the American people?
Well, my friends, you're conspiracy theorists.
Because I'll tell you where I operate from.
An anonymous statement from an official I don't know is not a story at all.
Well, that's where the weight is, and it's likely the story is bunk because you have three on-record, sourced officials in the know saying no.
So, you're conspiracy theorists.
The former Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, went on Fox News to flat-out refute what the DOD had said publicly, noting if this had, in fact, happened during the Trump years like they claim, it would have been spotted and certainly reported by the media.
The media would have gone nuts.
They would have been like, how could Trump do this?
Former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper also denied.
unidentified
Hey it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms4America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall and Moms4America has the exclusive VIP meet and greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
But we do have this story, so obviously you heard.
F-22 safely shoots down Chinese spy balloon off South Carolina.
U.S.
Air Force fighter safely shot down the Chinese high-altitude surveillance balloon today, Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III said in a written statement.
We now have this from Disclose.TV.
Chinese spy airship potentially carried explosives to destroy itself, Commander of the U.S.
Northern Command says.
Very, very interesting.
Now, Tom Cotton says the Biden administration delayed the shooting, the shooting down of the balloon to salvage Anthony Blinken's trip to China.
That is, they wanted to wait so he could go have this trip before they took down what they knew was surveilling us.
It's also very interesting.
I think I have the video right here with John Ratcliffe.
Let me play this video for you on the Biden administration trying to minimize this explosive
situation in this past week.
And the Department of Defense is claiming that there were three balloons, Chinese spy
balloons that entered the United Space Airspace during the Trump administration and that they
were not shot down and they were not disclosed.
Can you please tell us the truth?
unidentified
And if that's true.
Well, it's not true.
I can refute it.
Former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper refuted it yesterday.
Former Secretary of State and CIA Director Mike Pompeo has refuted it.
But Maria, the American people can refute it for themselves.
Do you remember during the Trump administration when photographers on the ground and commercial airline pilots were talking about a spy balloon over the United States that people could look up and see even with the naked eye and that a media that hated Donald Trump wasn't reporting?
I don't remember that either because it didn't happen.
As I said to you earlier, This was unprecedented.
We have never had a circumstance where an adversary has had spy craft over our country, our continental United States, posing a threat for the better part of a week straight.
And that's why I said to you before, not only is it unprecedented, but the damage from this is incalculable, both from an intelligence standpoint and the possible payloads.
You talked a little bit earlier about the different types of payloads that a stratospheric balloon could carry.
Those possibilities are limited only by your imagination.
Explosives, right?
But what we do know is none of those are possible to be deployed against the United States if a stratospheric balloon isn't allowed to traipse across our countryside for four straight days, something that has never- Alright, so John Ratcliffe, you get the point, he nails it.
during Trump administration discovered after he left office, according to a senior Biden official.
Oh, these people are so insane and evil.
Yeah.
When did they discover it?
They discovered it literally just now?
Well, actually, we noticed some data and surprise, surprise, it happened before.
They're lying.
Because they want power.
Because an election is coming up.
I just... You know what, man?
It's hard sometimes.
This is yesterday at 4 p.m., they made these claims.
Take a look at this one from Politico.
Biden admin offers to brief Trump officials on past Chinese spy balloon incursions.
Officials in the last administration denied the airships had flown over the U.S.
on their watch.
Why would the Biden administration brief them?
They're not in government!
Because it's a lie.
And if you believe it, you're in a cult.
I do not think everything Trump says is true.
I think Trump lies a lot.
I honestly don't even think Trump is... I don't even know if he's the right choice for 2024.
I am not on the MAGA train or anything like that.
Actually, I should say, in a general sense, making America great again is a good idea.
But I'm not the biggest Trump supporter.
I think Trump's done a lot of bad things, a lot of wrong things.
Commando raid in Yemen, killing a little girl, so it's alleged.
You gotta watch out for these stories to be completely honest.
But no, my friends, when you come to a channel like this, y'all know that we're fairly middle of the road on most of these things.
But you have these diehard default liberals who live in this world where if you don't believe whatever the government and the corporations tell you, you're a conspiracy theorist.
You're nuts.
That's just the craziest thing.
Take a look at this.
The offer, described by a senior Biden administration official on Sunday night, by officials on Sunday night, comes as former President Trump and senior members of his national security team say they were never briefed on such an incursion by a Beijing-sent aircraft.
This information was discovered after the prior administration left.
The intelligence community is prepared to offer key officials from the Trump administration briefings on China's surveillance program.
One of the officials said.
The official, along with several others, asked not to be named in order to discuss sensitive information.
Oh!
Another anonymous individual coming out and offering up garbage.
No one saw anything.
These were good balloons.
Like I said, they're blue.
Harder to see.
That was the difference.
That's what they should have done.
They should have said, actually, the balloons under Trump were blue.
Couldn't see them.
And then it's like, oh, the reason they did the white one?
Briefers would all be willing to discuss Beijing's similar operations in East Asia, South Asia, Europe over the past several years, blah, blah, blah.
The proposal to brief the Trump officials is the latest development following the military's shoot-down of the Chinese spy balloon.
They're going to say, on Saturday, a senior Defense Department official said the Chinese spy balloons entered the U.S.
airspace, blah, blah, blah.
We get it.
We get it.
I think it's just a whole bunch of lies.
Former spy chief John Ratcliffe denies reports of Chinese balloon instances under Trump.
The breaking news here from the examiner is the U.S.
military has recovered some remnants of the Chinese spy balloon.
That's about it.
I don't, you know, this one's not popping up for me.
It's premium.
Premium.
But breaking news.
So they've recovered a bit.
Now here's where it gets fun.
China accuses America of over overacting with indiscriminate force and vows necessary response as it ramps up the rhetoric insisting spy balloon shot down by F-22 fighter jet was a civilian airship as U.S.
military's hunt for remaining fragments continues.
A suspected Chinese spy balloon was shot down, this we know.
China's not too happy.
They've now accused America of using indiscriminate force in shooting down the balloon and said the action would be met with the necessary responses.
Vice Foreign Minister Xi Feng said he'd lodged a formal complaint with the U.S.
Embassy on Sunday over the U.S.
attack on a Chinese civilian unmanned airship by military force.
That was illegally in our airspace.
I don't even know if legality matters.
It's not like we're gonna sit here and file a lawsuit against China over doing this.
It's an act of war in my- Well, it's almost an act of war.
But not the same as balloons flying over our entire country.
Check this out.
So you've got these nuclear missile sites, the balloon, two of them apparently, look at this!
First one goes through Alaska, then Canada, into Montana, goes all the way down past St.
So you've got these nuclear missile sites, the balloon, two of them apparently, look
at this.
First one goes through Alaska, then Canada into Montana, goes all the way down past St.
Louis.
We probably could have seen it from where we are and then accessed over the Atlantic.
Are you kidding me?
Being monitored by fighter jets, solar panels, technical instruments.
A second balloon went down south through Central America over Venezuela, it appears.
Remarkable.
They say, The United States turned a deaf ear and insisted on indiscriminate use of force against the civilian airship that was about to leave the U.S.
airspace, which obviously overreacted and seriously violated the spirit of international law and international practice.
All right.
All right, China.
How about we send unmanned aircraft over your country and then get all hot and bothered when you shoot it down?
Ridiculous.
They mention a second suspected balloon was then spotted over Latin America.
I gotta be honest, I think China's gearing up for war.
I really do.
And I wonder if this is just a very convenient distraction to a couple stories that go in two directions.
First.
Actually, you know what I'll read first.
This one's from February 2nd.
Newsweek reports.
Joe Biden offered Vladimir Putin 20% of Ukraine to end the war, according to a report.
Good.
Good.
Assuming it's true, I don't know if I believe it.
The White House and the CIA have responded to a report that CIA Director William Burns offered Russian President Vladimir Putin a fifth of Ukraine's territory to end the ongoing war as part of a peace plan drawn up on behalf of President Joe Biden.
A CIA official told Newsweek that claims in the report from Swiss-German newspaper NZZ that Burns took a secret trip to Moscow in January and that was a peace proposal put forward by the director on behalf of the White House were completely false.
Oh, okay.
You know, when I saw the headline, I said, that's good news.
That's great.
Let's end this.
Oh, literally in the story, they come out and they say, the claim that there's a trip to try and end the war, completely false.
Oh, and then we have this from Michael Tracy.
The former Israeli Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett just confirmed what any rational observer could have surmised.
Russia and Ukraine reached a preliminary agreement during the early phase of the war.
Both sides very much wanted a ceasefire, Bennett said, but the U.S.
blocked it.
Bennett was one of the few world leaders seen as impartial and trustworthy by both Putin and Zelensky.
So when the invasion happened, he quickly took on a role as a shuttle diplomacy mediator.
He said he personally facilitated exchanges between Russian and Ukrainian negotiators.
On March 5th, 2022, nine days after the invasion, Bennett secretly went to Moscow and met with Putin.
Bennett says Putin agreed to two big concessions, renouncing the denazification of Ukraine, understood to mean regime change, and renouncing the disarmament of Ukraine.
Bennett says that simultaneously to this, based on his direct and tense involvement in the day-to-day negotiations, Zelensky also agreed to a big concession and would officially renounce NATO membership.
I say to myself, wow, that's a huge shift, Bennett recounts.
Speaking about this publicly for what he says is the first time, Bennett is pressed by the interviewer about what odds of success he had given to a diplomatic agreement last March and April.
Bennett insists there was at least an over 50% chance of agreement.
Quote.
Anything I did was coordinated down to the last detail with the US, Germany, France.
Said Bennett as an impartial mediator.
He said it wasn't for him to make prescriptive determinations about the correct policy choice.
I turn to America in this regard.
Bennett says he was in constant contact with Jake Sullivan, sometimes Blinken, sometimes Biden himself.
There was a decision by the West to keep striking Putin, he says, and it's clear he's talking about the U.S.
as the decisive player.
More decisive than even Ukraine or Russia.
Because when the rubber hit the road and the parameters of a diplomatic settlement had been mutually agreed upon by both Ukraine and Russia, they blocked it.
Bennett said, as in the US, and I thought they were wrong.
Listing some downsides of this decision, Bennett cites, for example, the casualties piling up in the war, destruction of Ukraine's infrastructure, negative impact on international food supplies, rise in energy costs, large scale emigration.
The upside is what he says is a statement that had been made.
President Biden created an alliance vis-a-vis an aggressor in the general perception.
And this reflects on other arenas, such as Taiwan.
So on the one hand, mass death.
On the other hand, Biden made a statement.
Oh, bravo for him.
For some reason, it's still controversial in certain quarters to make the trivially obvious factual observation that U.S.
policy from the very beginning has been to fuel and expand the war, not curtail it.
So if the naysayers, here's another piece of slam-dunk evidence.
Fair point.
And as regards, you know, if Tali Bennett, please note, I am not taking him at his word.
I am relaying the words he spoke within the past few days about a critical sequence of
events he was personally involved in, though I'd still be curious to hear the theories
of why he'd be lying.
Fair point.
And this is where we're currently at with the Biden administration.
I think the story about the balloons over United States and the Trump administration
Hey guys, Josh Hammer here, the host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer, a podcast for the First Podcast Network.
Look, there are a lot of shows out there that are explaining the political news cycle, what's happening on the Hill, the this, the that.
There are no other shows that are cutting straight to the point when it comes to the unprecedented lawfare debilitating and affecting the 2024 presidential election.
We do all of that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
I wish it was that easy on the side of individual liberty, meritocracy, responsibility, where if you really wanted to win political points, you just lie to people.
It doesn't work.
That's why for the longest time the Republican Party has been relatively small compared to the Democrats.
Republicans do well convincing people.
Democrats do well by lying to people.
That's why Democrats want to lower the voting age to 16, where people are too young and inexperienced to know they're being lied to.
Unfortunately for Republicans and Libertarians, you're on the hard side of this one.
Gotta tell the truth, otherwise you're not gonna cut it.
Post polls from the Washington Post.
Americans not feeling impact of Biden agenda post ABC poll finds.
What does that mean?
They say, during his time in office, would you say Biden has accomplished a great or good deal?
Not much, little or nothing, or no opinion.
Among U.S.
adults, 62% say they felt nothing.
Among Democrats, 77% say he did a good job.
Because you're in a cult.
Please listen!
Yo, we had the Krasensteins on.
Liberals, defend Biden no matter what he does.
And, um, man, I asked him, do you think the economy is good?
And they're like, we think it's not bad.
It's improving.
I'm like, that's really funny.
Because when you look at the polls, Democrats flip right when Biden gets elected.
They're like, the economy is bad.
Dude, the economy is now good.
So it's down, like Trump, the economy bad.
Ooh, economy good.
Literally the moment Biden gets elected.
That is not organic.
That is a cult.
Trump supporters go back and forth for the most part, still have some of this element.
Trump gets elected and all of a sudden they're saying things are better.
Not nearly as pronounced as Biden.
With Biden it's an insane swing from like, the economy is the worst it's ever been, and then a week goes by and it's, the economy's better than ever!
Among independents, where it matters, 66% say not much, little or nothing.
Biden has accomplished not much, little or nothing.
And of course, Republicans say 93% he's accomplished not much or nothing.
Now, 7% of Republicans apparently say he did.
And among Democrats, you still have 22% saying he didn't.
And that's the 22% of Democrats that perhaps can eventually wake up or are waking up.
But please, wake up.
I don't know what else we can do.
That's just how we have to do it.
that the White House cast as the most effective in modern history. President Biden is set to
deliver a State of the Union address Tuesday to a skeptical country with a majority of Americans
saying they do not believe he has achieved much since taking office. That means tomorrow night,
we're gonna have a special Timcast IRL where we do live commentary, interrupting the president
and making it hard for you to hear him. I don't know what else we can do. That's just how we have
to do it. You know, it's like, do you wanna listen to him or us? What I try to do is make a little
bit of both, but you know, we really can't compete with the State of the Union and we all need to
watch it at the same time. So watch party.
We'll see what he has to say.
So they did a poll, they found that 62% of Americans think Biden has accomplished not very much or little or nothing during his presidency, among all U.S.
You can take a look at when he comes in office and then all of a sudden you start seeing inflation spike.
time speech on Tuesday. The president is expected to use the platform to tout his accomplishments
and remind voters that many of the laws he signed during the first half of half of his term are now
being implemented. No, sorry. You can take a look at when he comes in office and then all of a sudden
you start seeing inflation spike. There's no explanation for that other than Biden made policy
changes because it doesn't happen under Trump. They say it's a message he's pushed before the
midterm elections when his party's better than expected performance convinced many aides
that despite his low approval ratings, Americans largely support his agenda.
Biden has said one of his main goals for the year is to make sure Americans feel the impact of the laws he signed during his first two years in office.
Oh, we're feeling him.
And it sucks.
It's one thing to have passed it at all.
Now we have to make sure we're on it every single day.
Not a joke, Biden said in a January 26th speech on the economy, implementing it so people can see what we've delivered and give it to them directly.
Overall, the poll's findings are not reassuring for either party.
On the looming fight over the debt limit, most Americans are closer to Biden's position than the GOP's, and most dismiss Republican plans to investigate the government's weaponization as political.
Yeah, well, you know what?
Don't care.
They have to do it.
And Americans have little confidence in either Biden or House Speaker McCarthy to make the right decisions for the country's future.
Just under 2 in 10 Americans have a great deal or a good amount of confidence in the Speaker to do so.
How much confidence do you have in blank to make the right decisions for the country's future?
Biden, 31% say a good deal, 68% say just some or none at all.
Kevin McCarthy, this is everybody answering.
19% say a great deal, and 71% say just some or none at all.
And the funny thing is, among Democrats and Republicans on both, they're comparable.
But it's a weird way to poll.
Like, if you went to someone and say, do you trust Biden or Trump?
Yes or no?
They'd be like, no, I guess?
Like, what is this question?
There's two people involved.
How do you poll this way?
But whatever, you get the point.
The American people ain't having it.
Biden has said the Obama administration did not do enough to tout all of the legislative victories in the aftermath of the Great Recession and he had promised not to repeat that mistake.
The president recently said he had put together an implementation cabinet of top officials whose job is to just do nothing but let people know what we have already done.
Wow, yeah.
But many of the laws passed in 2022 will not be fully implemented for months or years, and challenges facing consumers today, such as lingering inflation and broader economic uncertainty, could complicate the White House push to get credit for its achievements.
Just under a third of Americans think Biden has made progress improving roads and bridges in their community.
Yeah, maybe I'd have more faith in that if the guy didn't send a hundred billion dollars to Ukraine, where we know he's been engaged in illicit business dealings.
You want to know where we are as a country?
I don't even want to show this stuff.
It's sad.
Zombie Nation.
Harrowing images lay bare the crippling drug crisis ravaging America's communities.
Stretching from the Pacific Northwest to Massachusetts and from Louisiana to Philadelphia.
And this one's just for you guys.
From the Daily Mail.
Art dealer representing Hunter Biden calls him one of the most consequential artists in this century, as he sells his paintings for up to $500,000, but refuses to say if he will name the buyers to Congress.
Ah, yes.
Hunter Biden!
The great painter!
Look at these amazing works of art.
Truly, a revolutionary.
Yeah, here's what I think.
I think they're laundering money, in plain sight.
Hey, you did us a favor, Biden family.
How do we give you money?
I know!
I'll buy a painting for half a million dollars!
Uh-huh.
Please.
Now look, there's probably some value in these paintings for the spectacle of them, but half a million dollars?
Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and say I think this is probably a money laundering scheme, but that's just my opinion based on what we're seeing.
I don't actually know for sure.
I guess we can just sit back and watch the Bidens do their Biden thing until we can vote him out.
And I certainly hope y'all do.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastNews.
Check it out!
Three segments.
6, 615, 630, and then TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out, and we'll see you all next time.
I want you all to answer honestly in the comments.
How many of you knew the Grammys happened last night?
Because I didn't until I started seeing the stories pop up with videos of a guy dancing around with devil horns on and apparently this is like Kim Petras who performed with Sam Smith.
It's the first trans woman to win an award or something at the Grammys.
But honestly, I had no idea it was happening.
None.
The Grammys used to be a cultural force.
At its peak, I think in 2012, around 39 million people watched.
I have the stats pulled up and last year it was like 8 million.
And so, uh, when you're in a lockdown and ratings are through the roof and everything, but your ratings are down by 70%, yeah, maybe you're not just culturally relevant anymore.
But what I do find interesting here is the art choices made by Sam Smith and Kim Petras, as well as what Kim Petras represents.
First, at the Grammys, which again, used to be a cultural force, you can see, for some reason, the establishment narrative machine, the corporate press, Corporate media are trying to push this, or at the very least they're thinking this is what will make them money.
Satanic non-binary Sam Smith, singing a song called Unholy.
Kim Petras, I believe is a German trans woman, celebrating, and this is the important factor, Kim Petras is famous for getting transgender surgery before becoming an adult, as a child.
I should say as a minor, a young teenager.
So, when we talk about the cultural shifts that took place at the end of the 2000s into the 2010s, and you had a lot of people saying that if you do X, you will get Y, it opens the door.
Well, these conservatives were all told they were crazy.
But now, quite literally, we're at the point where you have these prominent activists saying nobody wants to give minors irreversible surgery that would effectively castrate or sterilize them.
That's not happening.
Sometimes, maybe double mastectomies.
But now we have two extremely prominent, famous individuals.
You have Jazz Jennings, who got transgender surgery.
I mean, puberty blockers... I'm not trying to be mean to any of these people, right?
Okay?
I hope that's clear.
But I believe it is likely puberty blockers sterilized, or I shouldn't say sterilized for Jazz Jennings, but prevented the development of reproductive functions.
I think that was actually something they said in their show.
And then as for Kim Petras, also as a minor, now unable to reproduce as everyone claps and cheers, maybe that's what they want.
But I gotta admit, it does feel like there's something a bit satanic about the destruction and degradation of culture.
Let me read you the story, and then I'll talk about what's going on here and the important factors as it pertains to culture.
Because the one thing I wanna say, as you're looking at all this... Well, there's a couple things.
The first thing I'll say is, like, I get art, okay?
Art is allowed to be edgy and provocative.
I have no issue with that.
But it is interesting what's added to the art, and that is Sam Smith claiming that he's non-binary.
I'm not entirely sure, you know, what that means.
He's discernibly male.
Maybe that's just me.
Old fogey.
Can't figure it out.
And Kim Petras, who is biologically male, and received surgery before becoming an adult.
Those elements, that's factual.
That's not art.
That's literal and they're putting it up on stage.
So here's the... I don't care as much about satanic imagery, right?
You want to be in a heavy metal band and you want to, you know, put satanic imagery or whatever because you're trying to be edgy and shocking.
The issue here is the Grammys are trying to... they want you to clap and cheer at the idea of a male child being surgically castrated As a minor, as an adolescent, that is what is on stage.
So we don't need to focus on the satanic thing, although many of you can probably say it's the same thing.
Sure, if that's what you think.
I'm just saying, art can do that, right?
I'm not going to fault metal bands who are like, bro, you know, whatever, because they do something like that.
And the song's called Unholy.
I don't know the theme of the song, but maybe there's something even worse in there.
But let me read the story for you.
And I do want to say, as we're getting started, you know, I don't know if you guys heard, there was a major, uh, two major earthquakes in Turkey.
It was in, uh, Gaziantep.
I'm probably pronouncing it wrong, sorry.
But, uh, southern Turkey on the border of Syria.
And it's bad.
It's 7.8 and a 7.5, I believe.
There's not much for me to add to this story, so I'm not doing a morning segment on it, but I do want to highlight this and thoughts and prayers and whatever you can do to try and help if you're interested.
It's tragic.
These videos are horrifying.
There's buildings falling over.
This is a massive earthquake.
So, again, not much for me to add to that story, so I was going to go for the American cultural story for this morning.
Post Millennial writes, In his Grammy performance on Sunday night, non-binary pop star Sam Smith staged a satanic performance of his song Unholy, for which she and the trans-identified Kim Petras won an award for Best Pop Duo.
Petras and Smith wore red, as did their dancers, while they performed the song.
Petras danced in a cage, Smith wore devil horns, while dancers in long red robes with long straight hair fawned around him in a ritual circle.
I'll tell you what I found very interesting in this story.
There's a bunch of other stuff to talk about today, too, but I'm going to save the more overtly political for the TimCast channel.
What I find interesting here is that many people have said that what we're seeing in society right now sounds so much like The End of Days or Revelations.
Is it Revelation?
I think it's Revelation.
I always get it wrong.
I'm sorry.
Everybody's always correcting me.
There's no S, or there isn't.
I don't know.
Revelation.
And some people are saying, like, doesn't it seem like this is prophetic or it's prophecy?
Well, I don't know.
I'm not saying that.
But I do think it's interesting that these people choose to portray this to people who already have concerns about it, right?
You have a large group of people being like, hey, what you're doing is demonic and satanic.
And they're like, I know.
Let's go on the Grammys.
Let's all dress up like devils and sing a song called Unholy while we cheer for an individual who underwent irreversible sex change surgery as a minor.
Yeah, you know, look, I gotta tell you guys, it's- it is coming.
There have been activists that have been coming out saying nobody wants minors to get surgery or whatever.
Not true, because the establishment machine is absolutely pushing it.
And hey, the only thing I can really say is the end result of that is less people.
Can't have kids.
Can't be more kids.
There's gonna be less people.
I wonder about that, huh?
Smith danced in the center of the group of dancers in what looked like a staged ritual performance.
Oh, really?
Smith and Petra sang Unholy, about parents who leave their child home so they can separately go commit adultery.
One verse discusses high fashion, including Balenciaga, which recently came under fire for, uh, yeah, their ads, if you know what I mean.
Petras breathlessly accepted the Grammy during the awards ceremony saying that Petras was the first transgender woman to win this award.
The Hollywood audience went wild as the diverse duo comprised of two biological white males made history in winning a Grammy for their duo performance.
You know, that is actually really interesting.
It is two discernibly male individuals winning an award.
Look, I don't care how people want to live their lives.
I really don't.
And, you know, we have transgender friends of the show and guests who've been on before, and talking about things completely unrelated to trans issues, I really, you know, I do think, you know, I hope you're happy and I hope you're living a good life and if this is what makes you happy.
The question is, though, about Kim Petras and what they're pushing when they claim they're not trying to advocate for children to get sex changes.
They are.
We keep hearing activists say that's not true and they don't want this, but let me stress, as Hollywood gives a standing ovation to Kim Petras, I want to show you the Wikipedia for Kim Petras.
Petras was born in Cologne, North Rhine-Westphalia.
Her mother's a choreographer and artist, her father is an architect, and her older sister is also a singer.
She was assigned male at birth.
In 2006, Petras, then age 13, appeared on a German television current affairs show in which she discussed her medical gender transition.
At age 14, Petras appeared in a documentary and a talk show in a push to get permission for early sex reassignment surgery at age 16, before the minimum age of 18 in Germany.
These appearances resulted in international media coverage of her transition, touting her as the world's youngest transsexual.
In 2007, she was a model for a German chain of hair salons.
Petras was evaluated by the head of the psychiatric unit at Frankfurt Hospital.
Dr. Bernd Mayenberg had approved for gender confirmation surgery at 16 years old.
Petras announced in November 2008 the surgery was completed.
The Daily Telegraph claimed Petras was the youngest person in the world to have had that surgery at the time.
About her surgery, she stated, I was asked if I feel like a woman now.
But the truth is, I have always felt like a woman.
I just ended up in the wrong body.
In an interview with BuzzFeed, Petra said the first song she ever wrote was about this dude in second grade who didn't like me back.
Okay.
Well, look.
What I think, as it pertains to a lot of these young people and being born in the wrong body, I think it's about time we start reflecting on petrochemicals, plastics, PCBs, and phthalates.
You guys know I use glass water bottles.
Didn't always.
Used to have plastic here.
I've made a lot of changes.
You've also noticed I've lost a lot of weight.
Because I started thinking about the things we do we don't care about and what we put in our bodies.
And I'll tell you what really got me going.
What really got me thinking about this.
Outer space.
No joke.
Outer space.
I'm thinking, you know, we breathe.
We breathe in the air.
It's a combination of gases.
Our body uses the oxygen for bodily functions.
And it's the right concentration for how our bodies work.
And when you go into outer space, you have to have a miniature capsule which has a fragment of that atmosphere in it.
And I really thought, you know, humans are not individual, independent beings.
We are all interconnected parts of this biome and atmosphere.
We move around in it as part of it.
There's a bunch of different chemicals and functions come together to create this complicated process that is you.
In thinking about that, I started thinking about what are the things we've been introducing to our bodies that could be damaging.
And so that's why I was like, you know what?
I'm not eating sugar.
I should probably just stop.
And then we talked about plastics and I got rid of it.
We still have plastic on our food.
You can't get rid of it.
It's impossible.
But we've done a lot to have farm fresh food, farm fresh eggs, to get wax paper wrapped things, plastic wrapped things.
It's not perfect.
You're going to get plastics.
But I have to wonder.
These PCBs and phthalates, the reason I bring them up is they're endocrine disruptors.
They disrupt your hormone balance.
So for someone like Petrus, I have sympathy for him.
I can't imagine what it must feel like to be in the wrong body.
I mean, for me, I feel like I'm in absolutely the right body.
It feels pretty good, I guess.
I mean, I don't think about it.
But after exercising, I'll tell you this, working out, Skating last week, getting all sweaty, and just feeling like I'm in full control.
It feels fantastic.
I can't imagine what it must be like to not feel that way.
The issue, however, is I don't think for a lot of people, it's, I think for a lot of people, it's an issue of, maybe for younger people, some, PCBs and phthalates.
Was it polychlorobiphenols or something like that?
I don't know.
We talk about it on the show.
I'm not gonna remember every single scientific word.
But I wonder if in the womb, you know, these mothers are drinking plastics, drinking from and eating from plastics, and these phthalates and PCBs are disrupting the endocrine system in the babies and feminizing male babies, resulting in them coming out and being like, something's wrong here.
Like they have a feminized mind or something.
I'm not saying all.
I'm saying potentially some.
Then, of course, there's a social contagion factor, which is why I think shows like this are dangerous.
If it's true that PCBs and phthalates are responsible for the uptick in transgender young people, or young people with gender dysphoria, I should say, then we're talking about a biological, chemical issue that needs to be treated and fixed.
And that means there's going to be some people who are suffering with gender dysphoria.
We want to help them.
But it also means, yo, we need to change this!
This whole get-up-on-stage-and-give-surgery-to-children is not solving the problem.
In fact, with a standing ovation from Hollywood, there's a potential for creating social elements of gender dysphoria.
Meaning, there are a lot of people who are going to be confused.
I mean, Sam Smith says he's non-binary.
But what does that really mean?
I mean, the dude is just a male.
And the worrying thing to me about this is, my guy, you don't have to be a lumberjack.
Men can be many things.
unidentified
You know, some men have deep voices and talk like this.
You don't need to come out and say you're non-binary.
See, that's the social element.
Non-binary, of course, is a social construct.
Sam Smith is just a biological male.
That's it.
So I wonder...
If getting up on stage and giving a standing ovation, while I can understand you're trying to be heartwarming to someone you experience suffering, my concern is, are you going to have young people who are confused, who aren't dysphoric in the same way?
And then you're going to cause them physical harm.
The example, of course, I refer to is people who have detransitioned.
Clearly, the social elements, the standing ovations, resulted in some people feeling like it was okay or that's something they should do.
They were encouraged by everybody who thought they were being progressive and doing the right thing.
And then these people said, I was wrong.
This is not what I needed and there was no one really there to help me.
In which case, these surgeries were detrimental and very harmful to these individuals.
We don't want harm to come to anybody.
I want these people to be happy.
I want to stress, as well, for someone like Kim Petras, I'm wondering, for someone so young, and also Jazz Jennings, could it be petrochemicals, phthalates, PCBs, plastics, in which case, there is a real biochemical reaction that is resulting in young people experiencing gender dysphoria, and how do we help them?
That being said, I don't think taking someone who's suffering from something like this, and then putting them up on stage and clapping and cheering and saying, yes, yes, yes.
That's just, I don't think this is going to help anyone in the long run.
As for the satanic stuff, I gotta tell you, man, wow.
I mean, I'll play this clip for you.
It's the Grammys, there you go, you can hear it.
Dancing in a cage, devil horns, And what's funny is, it's also, who was that other guy?
That rapper dude who put blood in his shoes?
Man, they're really going for it.
And I wonder if it's because they got nothing left to go for.
Maybe they're deeply demonic people?
I don't know.
You can call them whatever you want.
Check this out.
From Statista.
Number of Grammy Awards viewers in the millions from 2000 to 2022.
In 2000, 27.8 million people watched the Grammys.
Crazy.
It started to fall down.
In 2002, it was only 18, well 19, round up.
2006 was 17.
But it went up.
In 2012, 39 million people watched.
That's kind of crazy.
And then it went back to 28, so they were doing pretty well.
And then from 2020, it went from 18, 2021, to 8.
And he went from 18, 2021 to 8, 2022, 8.9.
I think one of the reasons they may do the satanic thing is because they're desperately
trying to get people like me to talk about it, conservatives to talk about it, to generate
controversy so that the next time the Grammys happens, people will be like, ooh, I want
to watch because maybe there's something I can comment on in the cultural space.
They're going for a negative audience reaction.
You know what I'm thinking about this too, with people like Jimmy Kimmel.
And it's like, maybe what he's hoping for, when they do these segments that are just blatantly fake or whatever, is shock content.
Yeah, shock content.
That's a lot of what we have today, and people love it.
And I wonder if it's because we are a diseased culture.
And I don't just mean us, I mean the world in general.
I mean, think about it.
It's not just the satanic.
It is also the drama obsessions, the TM- well, I'm not trying to be a dick to TMZ, but yeah, the celebrity drama obsessions, where they latch on to one person, that one person who's completely irrelevant in politics and culture, all of a sudden gets elevated, and then everyone Screaming about celebrity, celebrity or personality and it's like none of that is going to impact whether or not you have eggs tomorrow.
And that's what's the most depressing thing to me.
You know, what matters to me in what I talk about?
Some people are like, Tim you say you don't care for drama but you talked about Hassan and the Young Turks and all that stuff.
And I'm like, well let me explain that.
I did a video talking about Mr. Beast curing blindness, not drama.
That's cultural commentary on something substantive that has 75 million views in less than a week.
Hassan came out, a leftist commentator, saying he was filled with rage that it took this YouTube guy to make content out of it to cure blindness, and cataract surgery takes 10 minutes, can cost upwards of $6,000.
People then started criticizing him, which is this tit-for-tat left and right thing.
So I'll tell you why I want to talk about it.
First, I'm like, why are y'all ragging on Hassan?
He's right!
How stupid is it that this 10-minute surgery they can't just get?
Now, I disagree with him, and he says, oh, you defend capitalism.
I'm like, well, dude, someone's gotta, you gotta feed people who do the work.
Someone's gotta go to school for 10 years to learn how to do this properly to help these people.
It takes technology.
It takes academia.
It takes infrastructure.
But I agree.
I think we'd be better off fixing the pipes in Flint, Newark, as Sam pointed out, Pittsburgh, and curing this blindness than a lot of other things.
However, when I point out $100 billion to Ukraine, and they've not explained to us why they're spending that money, He gets mad at me.
So the issue there is not drama.
The issue there is can we solve worldly problems and make your life better if the only thing we get in the cultural and political space is I don't care that you're right, I'm going to disagree with you for the sake of my audience.
That's not drama to me.
Drama to me is like these channels that We'll talk about YouTubers.
You know, I don't want to say these channels' names, but I disassociate from them.
Like, they make video after video.
Like, the Young Turks I'll mention, because I mentioned them in the San video.
But they make a bunch of videos about me, taking quotes out of context to just lie.
I'm like, that is the same thing as the degradation of culture.
That is the degeneracy, in my opinion.
Because I can come out here and I can be like, Here's what's happening to our culture.
Here's how I feel about it.
Here's what worries me.
Will your kids have a good future?
Will there be food?
You know, I did a segment last week about... What was I talking about?
I think I have it here.
A woman in a gym and men don't help her put the squat rack back.
She couldn't lift it.
She was stuck and she needed help.
Like, that's not drama.
That is, our culture is being negatively impacted by these things.
I'm not going to say these people's names.
Typically, when I talk about issues, too, I even said, I don't want to mention who these people are who do drama because I'm not interested in the drama.
I'm interested in the ideas on top of that.
What are we doing as a people?
Here's what I want to do.
I want to sit down with people like Jeff Younger, whose kid has been taken to California and may be surgically or chemically castrated.
I want to talk to sitting members of Congress and say, hey, what about this policy?
What I don't want to do is play stupid drama games with people who make money off of making videos about me or other commentators, and all they do is spam my name.
I don't matter!
That's what really bothers me.
If there's one thing that really, really makes me want to just quit all of this and have nothing to do with it is the drama nonsense and the obsession with me.
I don't care.
I'm not interested in talking to people who talk about me because I don't matter.
I know technically it's not true.
I have a large audience and I'm influential in that right.
But I'm a guy who complains about stuff on the internet.
Basically all I do.
And so when I see things, I'm like, here's what I think about it and here's what bothers me.
And I care about things that are deeply impacting our culture and our world because I want to go to Mars.
I want to go to the stars.
I want to terraform planets.
I want to see humanity strive.
I want to see people's lives better.
And then what really bugs me is shock content.
That's what the Grammys are doing.
They're irrelevant to you and everyone else and they know it.
So they do this stuff to make you angry.
And I'm just like, man...
I don't know if there's a solution.
I don't know if humans could be anything other than this.
There's a Bill Maher segment that he just did, I guess the other day, where he said you can't change human nature, and Mao thought he could, and it was brilliant.
And he rags on woke people, and it's one of the most respectable things I think he's said in a long time.
And so I'm actually like, okay, you know, this Bill Maher guy, alright, that's pretty good.
That's pretty good, Bill.
I've been a fan for a long time, very critical of some of his Trump Derangement Syndrome stuff, but he came around.
So I'll take it.
I'll take what I can get.
You know, I look at this stuff and at the Grammys, the drama, and I'm just like, Look, we had Steven Crowder on this show.
We had Candace Owens.
Candace was booked well before the Crowder thing happened with Stop Big Con.
I like the Daily Wire guys.
I think they're all good people.
I really do.
But I like Steven Crowder, and I talk to him even after the show.
I'm like, this guy's sincere.
He really means it.
And it's not about the drama.
This was a conversation about the future of media and whether or not we're moving in one direction or the other.
Are we going the traditional Hollywood route for independent media?
Is it going to be a new Hollywood machine?
Hey, look, if The Daily Wire goes that route, I'm happy because they're producing more traditional American values in their messaging, in their content.
But Crowder wants to go this more decentralized route.
Very important conversation.
It's not drama.
It's, are we going to build a machine that better serves all of us?
But you know what, man?
With all the drama going on this past weekend.
And of course, I know there's drama involving me.
You know what I was doing?
I was playing Hold'em.
Had a good time.
Went to a local casino.
Just learning how to play the game better.
And it was fun and funny and people were laughing and having a good time.
And I'm like, man, we need just culture building like this.
Nobody talking politics.
Everybody was just trying to get along, be friends.
Handful of people there knew who I was and took some pictures.
And I was like, ignore all the nonsense.
Let's focus on the bigger picture issues here.
I think the Grammys doing a Titanic award show matters.
I do.
Because I think they're desperate and in their desperation they will push ideas and culture that will further erode and dismantle and destroy.
That being said, that's probably why they only have 9 million viewers last year.
8.93.
They're driving themselves into irrelevancy.
When you chase after... Look, these commentators who only talk about me, surprise, surprise, it's like...
Some of the most viewed videos they have.
But then you look at their other videos and there's nothing there.
And I'm like, my guy?
Do you know why you're getting no views on your political commentary but you're getting a ton of views on your videos about me?
Because your audience has come to expect that you're a drama baiter.
And so they stop watching your channel.
And then the people who stay just hate me.
And all you're doing is making my name more recognizable and I think it's stupid.
But that's what they do!
You know, maybe I should shut all my channels down and then just wear a mask and make new channels so no one will know who I am now, because then all they'll do is just dox you.
It's just silly nonsense.
I think people need to stop worrying so much about individuals and focus more on the ideas and where they lead us.
But I have to say though, in all fairness, we are humans and we care about people more than anything else.
So, I care about the systems in which people survive because bad systems means more death and decay.
But to a regular person, they just care about the person.
I'm not surprised celebrity matters to so many people because we're people and people care about people.
You're not going to go to a person and be like, let's talk about rock.
They're going to be like, I don't know anything about that and don't care.
I want to know about the person, the people, because people make up human existence.
I can respect that.
Me?
I'm not interested in the drama, so I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 PM on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all there.
The debate over medically-assisted suicide has been happening for a long time.
I remember when I was little, I heard about Dr. Kevorkian and how he would assist people in ending their lives, and my understanding was that it was typically people who were terminally ill and suffering and old, and his point was that, you know, if you don't want to be alive anymore and you're suffering, well then maybe that should be allowed.
Here's the thing.
The slippery slope is not a fallacy.
It's real.
When you reset the boundaries of society, you open the door to go into darker and deeper areas.
That is to say, I have to talk about social engineering.
I shouldn't say often, but I have in the past.
And the idea with any kind of manipulation of a person or social group is that you can't push them beyond their reasonable boundaries.
That is to say, you can't tell your average person to rob a liquor store.
They won't do it.
They have to be conditioned.
How do you condition them?
Well, first you can maybe give them an ideology about capitalism being wrong or something.
Then you can say, it's just a dollar, it's a candy bar, what's the big deal?
And then eventually you're like, hey, these are evil corporations, right?
You have to inch them towards it.
What happens to our society is that we start having a conversation about whether or not doctors should be allowed to terminate the lives of elderly people because, well, they don't have much time left anyway.
And you know what?
I think there's a reasonable argument in I'll put it this way, you guys watch Yellowstone?
I have everybody screaming in my ears to watch Yellowstone, so I decided to watch Yellowstone.
And, uh, I'm gonna give you a spoiler, because the show's on Season 5, and this is like the first or second episode.
But there's a dude who's critically injured, some other guy walks up and he's like, oh man.
And then the guy is injured, he's like, kill me, and then he's like, ugh, and he puts him out of his misery.
That's what we call it, putting him out of his misery.
My attitude was like, no, don't do that.
But the injuries were catastrophic.
And so the idea is, in the show, they're all saying like, well, it was the right thing to do.
I mean, this guy was not going to survive.
He had 40 minutes of life left of suffering.
But I'm not a fan.
I don't like the idea of putting a human out of their misery because of the door that it opens.
And now we have the story from the Daily Mail.
Oregon becomes America's first death tourism destination with one doctor death offering terminally ill people from out of state a deadly cocktail of drugs at his assisted suicide clinic.
And they say, you know, that it's, it's, it's, you've got some grievous illness.
But all you gotta do is take a look at our friends over in Europe and in Canada, and then you can recognize it will not end there.
Of course not.
In Canada, they're actually saying that if you're just mentally ill, they will terminate your life.
However, there is a moratorium until March of this year for some reason.
But they said you don't need to be terminally ill.
You can just be mentally ill, and they'll take your life from you.
That's a scary thought.
Because the door that opens, we are inching towards... You know, look, have you guys ever watched Futurama?
Let's talk about Futurama.
Suicide Booth.
I love this.
How did Futurama get it so right?
Serious question.
How did they get it so right?
In the show feature, I'm sure most of you are aware, in the first episode, Fry thinks it's a phone booth and he's gonna call somebody, and it's actually a suicide booth, and Bender pushes him and he's like, let's get a twofer.
You know, two for one.
And then Fry's like, ah, screaming.
Bender says that the reason he wanted to take his own life was that he found out the metal he was bending was being used in suicide booths.
Haha, irony.
But it's funny because We made, this show came out in what was like early 2000s, Futurama.
I think it was like 99 actually.
And the idea of the show was that in the future they had no regard for life at all.
It didn't care, whatever.
And we're getting there.
Technically, we're getting there way later than they theorized.
In Futurama, the lore was that the suicide booths were invented in, like, 2006.
But maybe it's because the writers were looking at things like Dr. Kevorkian and being like, you know, we're probably gonna get to a point where people are just told, sure, why not?
It's a scary thought because you start to get into this territory.
In Canada, there was a viral story of this woman.
She did a commercial and she was like, I can't get health care but at least I can get death care.
She didn't say that in the commercial.
She said something like, being given the opportunity for dignity and integrity.
Like, she had no choice and she was dying and so at least she can choose and take agency.
When in reality, The government medical system that they have up there refused her treatments, and because she couldn't get it, she said, well, if I can't get healthcare, I'll take death care.
Quite literally, the government's saying, we control whether or not you'll get access to this medicine.
You will not.
Therefore, your other option is, end it all now.
Now look.
I am not an insane person.
I understand there are finite resources and technology doesn't exist if we don't make it exist.
And so someone who's got a rare genetic disorder, we can't just snap our fingers and cure.
If the cure doesn't exist, they don't get the cure.
That being said, if the cure is rare and extremely hard to develop, and we can only cure one or two people, they may actually say, yes, it exists, but we can't give it to you, and it's not because we want you to die, it's because it's just really hard to do.
Technology.
We don't understand the entirety of everything.
Of course not.
We're so far from it.
So maybe in the future we'll cure more things.
We'll get better at gene, you know, editing for curing genetic disorders or things like that.
There's also a scary, slippery slope in there.
But this is where we're going.
Here's a story from the Daily Mail.
Oregon has become America's first death tourism destination where terminally ill people from Texas and other states that have outlawed assisted suicide have started traveling to get their hands on a deadly cocktail of drugs to end their lives.
In the liberal, I love how they say that, bastion Portland, at least one clinic has started receiving out-of-staters who have less than six months to live and meet other strict requirements of the state's death with dignity law.
Dr. Nicholas Gidionce, probably pronouncing it wrong, Gidions, the director of End of Life Choices Oregon, recently told a panel that he was advising terminally ill non-residents on traveling to Oregon to end their lives despite a legal gray area.
Me personally, I think he's committing homicide.
I just, I'm sorry, I understand the context, but I think he is quite literally enticing people and then killing them.
Dr. Gideons, an advocate of magic mushroom therapy, said he was helping a Texan man suffering from Lou Gehrig's disease and a hospice patient on the East Coast, but added that there were not yet tons of people coming from all over.
But for a small number of patients who otherwise qualify or are determined to go through that, and who have the energy and the resources, it has started to happen, he said.
Interesting.
Out-of-state residents must be able to spend at least 15 days in Oregon to process the paperwork, which requires sign-offs from two doctors and witnesses, before administering the fatal dose themselves, says the clinic's website.
Dr. Gideons and the clinic operate in a legal gray zone.
The state last year agreed to extend access to doctor-assisted suicide to out-of-staters, but this is not expected to be codified into law until later this year.
And I think that should be a federal crime!
Oregon should not be able to say, we will kill people that come from other states.
They can't assert that jurisdiction.
That, to me, is nuts.
And if this is the plan they have for how the world's gonna work in the future, oh, it's like you're an American, but you can go to this country and commit a crime?
No.
That's not, we can't have, we cannot, we cannot function this way.
But that's, to be fair, between countries, it's basically how it works.
So my question is, if I live under the jurisdiction of one state, and then you want to go do something illegal, you go to a different state, there's no penalty for that?
There's challenges there as it pertains to if you, I understand federal crimes, but if you commit a crime against someone in West Virginia but you do it from Pennsylvania where they didn't make it illegal, I mean, how does this work?
Right?
You have wronged someone in this state, that state will go after you.
Okay, so here's my point.
They may be killing people from out of state because it's legal in Oregon or it's in a gray zone, but Texas should go after them for the killing of their resident.
Why not?
I mean, I just, I can't, I can't, I can't see how the system works.
They want to say America's first death tourism destination throws up tough legal questions for family members who may want, who may help a loved one reach Oregon from a prohibitionist state.
They could face arrest or even be prosecuted in their home state as a result.
I'd just like to point out something.
Isn't it interesting how there's an overlap between the states that would allow you to kill yourself and the states that allow you to get abortions?
They tend to be the same political leanings.
You know, I think Ian has said this.
I don't want to put words in Ian's mouth.
But that if people want to end their lives and they're determined to, you can't stop them.
It's like, right, right, right.
Look, if you saw someone on a bridge, right?
Would you be like, hey, hey, that's their choice!
Or would you be like, don't do it!
And then grab them and try and stop them?
You try and stop them.
You don't just say, well, you know, they can choose to do what they want to do.
They're determined.
No, we try and stop them.
Just because someone's determined to do it doesn't mean you don't try and stop them when they're determined.
There are many people who have done a bunch of, I'm not going to name any of these things, but there's things people do to themselves, trying to end their lives, and when we find out, we stop it and we try to save them.
For critics, Oregon's nascent death tourism industry, and efforts to create another in Vermont, show how the U.S.
is on a slippery slope to following in Canada's footsteps, where lax rules allowed people with so little as hearing loss to be euthanized.
No joke!
Take a look at this.
Canada.ca.
In order to be eligible for medical assistance in dying, you must meet all of the following criteria.
They say, you must be eligible for health services funded by the federal government or a province or territory.
That's funny.
Generally, visitors to Canada are not eligible for medical assistance in dying.
You must be at least 18 years old and mentally competent.
It means being able, being capable of making health care decisions for yourself.
Have a grievous and irredeemable medical condition.
Make a voluntary request for a maid that is not the result of outside pressure or influence.
How would you even know?
Give informed consent to receive made.
Grievous and irredeemable medical condition.
To be considered as having a grievous and irredeemable medical condition, you must meet all of the following criteria.
Have a serious illness, disease, or disability, excluding a mental illness until March 17th.
Be in an advanced state of decline that cannot be reversed.
Experience unbearable physical and mental suffering from your illness, disease, disability, or state of decline that cannot be relieved under conditions that you consider acceptable.
You do not need to have a fatal or terminal condition to be eligible for a medical assistance in dying.
There it is, right there.
That's where this goes.
Tough question.
Legitimate question.
You open the door to medical assistance in dying, when someone's terminal, and I understand, but how long then until someone says, I've got mental anguish from a terror attack, but I'm otherwise completely healthy.
And then you say, I want to enter that program.
That's what's happening.
You don't need to have a fatal or terminal condition.
And there have been stories.
There was a guy who had hearing loss.
No joke.
Hearing loss.
And they killed him.
And his family was shocked, like, why?
They were like, well, he was suffering.
He was suffering an irredeemable condition that was on the decline, and he couldn't live this way.
And they were like, he could get a cochlear implant.
I don't wanna put words in his mouth, but, you know, when we were told that basically if someone's determined, they're gonna do it.
The one thing, so every person who's jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge, and there are many, The people who've jumped off and survived have all said the same thing.
That as soon as they jumped, they regretted it, and they realized that all of their problems in life could be solved except for having just jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge.
And that says to me, this story, and I believe it.
You know why?
Because there are many people who have survived suicide attempts, who have made it through depression and said, I'm so glad I made it out.
I'm so glad.
I can't believe it.
And that says to me, I wouldn't say every single person.
I understand that there are people with terminal diseases, but that says to me that most people, the overwhelming majority, do not want to die.
Now, here's the scarier thought in all of this.
We can talk about opening doors or whatnot and whatever when it comes to this suicide stuff, but what's worrying to me, I suppose, what happens if someone's diagnosed with an illness?
Incorrectly.
Now, that's a scary thought.
If you don't allow assisted suicide, and someone's diagnosed, and they say, we think it's cancer, and you only have six months to live, and they're like, oh no, and they're suffering, and then it turns out that it was a misdiagnosis of some sort, or cancer goes into remission.
And they're like, wow, I made it.
I survived.
Dietary changes, exercise, something happens, and then all of a sudden it starts going away.
What if they say, you're terminal, you've got two weeks to live, and they say, oh well, might as well end it all now.
But they would have survived.
That's a scary prospect to me.
The challenge, I suppose, is there are a lot of people who are libertarian and say, it's not your life, you don't get to choose, people can choose how they live their own lives or not.
And my attitude is just like, dude, some people suffer and are under a period of emotional distress and we need to save lives.
We help these people and invariably they say, I'm glad I made it.
That's what I'm saying.
I'm like, the evidence suggests people don't want to die.
Take a look at this.
This chart.
Steady rise in organs, physician-assisted suicide since late 1990s.
Prescriptions written DWDA deaths What does that stand for DW die death with dignity?
Mm-hmm And you can see a sharp increase from 1998 under 50 to now just over 350 for prescriptions and we're at around 250 or a little bit less with death with dignity 1997 How long?
Until we actually get to the death panel part I remember hearing those stories during the Obama elections, and they were like, he's gonna have death panels!
And the left was like, no he's not!
And it's like, oh, they actually are.
Think of it this way.
You're this woman in Canada, and you go to the government and say, please, I need this treatment.
It will end my suffering.
And they say, nope, you can't have it.
And she goes, okay, then just kill me.
That's what's happened.
That's where we're going.
Again, I'm not going to pretend that there's infinite medicine and cures for all ailments and the government's just keeping them a secret and keeping them hidden away like in the movie Elysium.
That's the dumbest thing.
You guys ever see that movie?
It's like everybody on Earth, it's all overcrowded and they're struggling and they speak Spanish and then up in the space station, everyone lives in luxury and they speak French.
Funny.
And then they have these things you can lay in that will cure cancer.
And they just don't let poor people have them.
And then in the end, they bring those machines down, like, we're gonna cure everyone's diseases, and it's just like, dude, that is literally not how it happens.
This is what leftists seem to think.
They think that, and to like what Hasan Piker was saying about curing blindness, they think that there is just infinite cure And that anyone can get it, but they've decided, no, you can't.
It's like, my guy, someone has to perform the surgery.
Someone has to be trained to do it.
We have to build the tools and the machines.
That means someone has to be paid to build the machines.
Why do they have to be paid?
Because they want to eat food.
You can't just be like, a command economy will dictate you get food, do these things.
That's a worse form of economic distribution than people choosing to give someone the money to do the thing.
I'll put it this simply.
Communists think everything is free.
That's it.
They're like, we could all get the surgery if it was free.
Sure, but that means people working and you're not paying them.
No, but if we give them food and shelter, then you don't need to pay them.
Dude, you still have to give them food and shelter.
So we have two choices.
Distributed economics and centralized, command economies.
Communism is where you get one guy who says, I'll make your committee, and they decide how to disperse things, and it doesn't work, because they don't have the ability.
And then you have capitalism, which the left confuses with corporatism.
Where people just decide.
We will privately allocate resources.
In fact, the academic definitions of the words, capitalism is the private transfer of wealth and communism is the public ownership.
That's it.
Meaning, capitalism quite literally means, and I think Marx coined it anyway, if you're a person, you own what you make, you can decide what you do with it.
Communists want the government to do that.
Well, get your regulations, vote for it, and it may come.
But anyway, this is the issue.
We don't have a cure for everything.
So I guess I'll throw it to you guys and ask you this as we read a little bit more about this guy.
Or actually, I want to talk to you about Dr. Kevorkian.
But tell me your thoughts on this one because, look, they may say I'm a milquetoast defense center, but I'm not the only one.
I do think there's a scary thought of actually being, you know, like, paralyzed, basically.
You know, bedridden, struggling, and in constant pain.
Nerve damage and cluster headaches.
And, or how about this?
How about this?
Radiation poisoning.
And they're like, you're gonna last another month, and it's gonna get bad, and there's nothing we can do about it.
And it's like, you know your terminal, your hair starts falling out, your teeth fall out, your body's just falling apart.
Like, at that point, do we just say, like, okay, man, we got it, like, this is too much.
What is the time frame that is acceptable for an individual to determine that ending someone's suffering is the right thing to do?
In the show Yellowstone, there's a guy who's got 40 minutes, so they're like, we gotta put him out of his misery.
We do it to animals all the time, but animals aren't people.
Or do we just say there is no circumstance where someone is put out of their misery, we do everything to save them, period?
I don't have all the answers on that one, man, because that's tough.
I try to empathize with people who are terminal, old, and sitting there dying and suffering and being like, just make it stop.
Try to empathize with somebody who's severely injured and they've got 40 minutes to live and they're like, please, please make it stop.
Like, man, what do you do?
In fact, in the show 1883, they do the same thing.
There's a woman who gets shot with two arrows.
She's dead.
And scalped.
And so then one guy just...
He finishes her off and he's like, he takes a pan and he starts digging to dig her grave for her.
And then, you know, the other character walks up and he's like, I need a shovel!
And he's like freaking out.
And then he's like, I had to do it.
I had to.
It's like, you know, the interesting thing about that is this woman had two arrows in her in the show, 1883.
She's done with those arrows in her.
She's gonna go into septic shock.
There's nothing they can do.
She was scalped.
She's gonna get infections.
She's not gonna make it.
But she's gonna make it for a few weeks before dying and suffering.
And she was hysterical.
So in that show, he decided the right thing to do was just...
Put her out of her misery, as they described it.
I disagree with all... I mean, I don't know, man.
I just... I don't have the strongest moral position to determine what is the right thing to do in these circumstances.
I can only tell you that watching the slippery slope happen in real time, in every possible way, is horrifying.
And I feel like if we keep going down this road like we're doing with what Oregon is doing, we are going to end up with suicide booths.
And then one day, you're going to be looking for your buddy, your brother, your mother, your father, your friend, your sister, your kid, your kid's significant other, And then you're going to find out they decided to abruptly walk into a suicide booth without telling anybody.
I just can't see that working.
And I can't see that being good for any of these people either.
Because I think, given the chance to live, they would like to live.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcast.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
It's never easy standing up for what's right.
If it was, everything would be right all the time and we'd live in a perfect utopia.
No, it's actually hard to challenge the machine and tell it no.
I won't back down.
This is a big story, ladies and gentlemen.
A famous professional athlete, female athlete, is saying she will boycott the World Surf League if they do not change their new transgender policy.
This is Bethany Hamilton.
She made some interesting points.
And you know, the one thing that always kind of bothers me with things like this is they always start off with, before I begin, I want to say I love and care about all people.
And it's just like, the fact that you have to say that, as if to imply by being concerned about people and civil rights, you somehow don't care about people?
Okay, look, here's my point.
Everyone does this.
I'll just mention that.
But the great point she makes is no one asked them.
No one came to the athletes and said, do you want to change the rules for the sport you compete in?
Imagine if one day you went to go watch, hey, the Super Bowl is this Sunday.
And they decided, we're not going to do the goal posts anymore.
We're going to do a goal net, like soccer, but football.
And you're like, wait, what?
Oh yeah, yeah, so it's on the ground now.
It's like, so you throw the football into the, you carry it into, I don't, there's no end zone?
No end zone!
It's a soccer net.
We changed the rules.
Never asked anybody.
Never asked you.
End of story.
That's the issue.
They're changing what the sport is without consulting anyone.
You wanna know what you need to do?
And this lady gets it.
Walk away!
Make your own league!
Seriously, man.
Bethany Hamilton says she'll boycott the World Surf League?
Well, good.
And then she can go to someone and say, here's my pitch.
We're gonna do the Earth Surf Extravaganza!
And we're gonna make new rules that apply to us, and we're gonna invite everybody, and then we're gonna take all your sponsors from you.
It's that simple.
Professional surfer Bethany Hamilton has stated she will boycott the World Surf League if they do not change the new transgender policy that allows biological males to compete against women.
Hamilton spoke out about the issue in a video posted to her Instagram account.
Quote, Today, I want to address the news that the World Surf League has officially made the rule that male-bodied individuals known as transgender athletes can officially compete in the women's division.
So that can't be the criteria, right?
adding, the league has said they are following the Olympics guidelines.
She makes a really great point.
She says, the Olympics guideline does like testosterone testing.
When did testosterone levels determine whether or not you were male or female?
So that can't be the criteria, right?
Good point.
The policy reads, in order for an athlete who was assigned male at birth and whose gender
has changed and identifies as a woman, the surfer must satisfy the International Surfing
Medical Association Medical Commission that her serum testosterone concentration has been
Has been less than 5 nmol continuously for a period of the previous 12 months, and secondly, meets any other requirements recently set by the Executive Committee and or Medical Commissions.
While I address the issue, I want to be clear, I strive to have love for all mankind, regardless of any differences.
But this concerns me as a professional athlete that is competing in the World Surf League events for the past 15 plus years.
And I feel that I must speak up.
And I must stand up for those in positions that feel they cannot say something about this.
Hamilton said, I think many of the girls currently on tour are not in support with this new rule and they fear being ostracized if they speak up, so here I go.
The surfer then listed a series of questions that she has about the policy change.
How is this rule playing out in other sports like swimming, running, and MMA?
Have any of the current surfers in the World Surf League been asked what their thoughts and opinions are on this new rule before it was passed?
Should there be a conversation with the 17 women and all of the men on tour prior to a rule change such as this?
Is a hormone level an honest and accurate depiction that someone indeed is a male or a female?
Is it as simple as this?
How did whoever decided these hormone rules come to the conclusion that 12 months of testing testosterone make it a fair and legal switch?
Why is the WSL's statement about trans women competing with women, and yet there's no mention of converted women competing with men?
Ooh, that was a good one!
Oof, that was a good one.
Australian surf legend Kelly Slater suggested the same, saying, make a trans division and we don't have this confusion.
Slater's Slater bandmate Peter King weighed into the trans athlete imbroglio saying,
stay out of women's sports where you miraculously win after being an average performing man.
Women's sports is not a backup plan when you can't win a trophy and money in the men's division.
Leagues like the World Surf League and sponsors like Red Bull,
will you now stand up to this now instead of harming women's sports?
Hamilton went further stating that she will boycott the league if the policy stands.
I personally won't be competing in or supporting the World Surf League if this rule remains.
Bravo!
Sorry if the clapping was a little loud.
I just genuinely mean it.
Bravo.
The League has left the door open for changing the policy at some point.
The World Surf League is working hard to balance equity and fairness, and it's important for a policy to be in place.
WSL Chief of Sport Jesse Miley Dyer told The Inertia, we recognize the policy may need to evolve over time
as we get feedback and see new research in the field.
I'm glad to see this man.
This is absolutely fantastic that she's speaking up.
She's not the first person to speak about this.
She won't be the last.
I know it because there's going to be some positive changes.
Now, for all the transgender athletes, I have a solution.
Let's make a trans league.
The NHL did it.
A bunch of conservatives got mad.
And I'm like, what are you getting mad about?
Man.
Well, traditional conservatives want males to compete with males and females with females because there are differences.
My attitude is only consent.
Okay?
If you have a female division and people spend money, invest, and train for that, and then you change it to a co-ed identity division, well, now you've got people who feel wronged.
NHL had trans men and trans women competing against each other.
A trans woman hit a trans man, got a concussion, and a bunch of conservatives were like, this is why you can't have men compete with women, yada yada.
And I'm like, I get that, but people get injured in men's sports and women's sports all the time.
I get it, this person was bigger.
But if this is a trans league, for transgender people, and they choose, why would anybody be mad about it?
That's exactly what we should be doing, saying, we make a new space, we make new rules, we're good.
Then no one, then, I mean, you get more sports.
More sports is good.
I'm down for that.
I'm down for that.
So, as many of you probably know, especially if you watch Cast Castle over at TimCast.com, we have Taylor Silverman, who is working here.
And her story, of course, is that she is a female amateur skateboarder.
She competes for money.
In many competitions.
I don't know if she's still competing.
She might be.
I don't know.
I need to ask her.
But she skates.
She knows about skateboarding.
She's pretty good.
And she came in second place to a bunch of transgender individuals who are biologically male.
I think it happened on a couple occasions.
So she now works here for a few reasons.
One, we are launching a skate show at Fredamistan.
We have this new building.
We're going to be setting up some kind of skate show.
I don't want to announce who's involved, but I think we have some big-name pro skateboarders who are going to be involved.
And I was like, we need a male host and a female host.
We need people who skate.
And she was interested.
And the other thing was like, I'm not going to let this, to the best of my abilities, where it makes sense, somebody who speaks up, challenges wrongs in a respectful way, who has people threaten them and try to destroy their lives.
I'm like, no, no, no, I will do what I can to make sure that that's not the end for this person who did the right thing.
Much like Project Veritas does with their whistleblowers, they hire them.
I was like, well, you know what?
It's actually fortuitous.
We got lucky.
I mean, let's put it this way.
Taylor's good at skating.
She knows all about the culture.
She's charismatic enough.
Charismatic enough, right?
You know, Taylor.
I'm not going to pretend like she's Trump-levels, but for a good show host, I think would be fantastic.
And happened to have done the right thing, and it works out.
This is what I'm hoping for.
I'm hoping that Bethany Hamilton finds something similar and it works out.
I'm also really excited that we're going to be launching this.
It's not just going to be a skate show.
It's going to be, like, everything.
So, the way I describe it is like, if you've ever seen Dude Perfect, which is throwing footballs and ping pong balls.
But with action sports.
So we'll have pro skateboarders, bladers, bikers, scooters, pogo sticks, whatever you want to do.
And then we'll do fun challenges in action sports and cool things.
And Taylor will be one of the hosts for that.
We were supposed to launch a while ago, but the building of course got jammed up.
I'm just saying what we need to do is lend our support to people like Bethany Hamilton and Taylor and others who are willing to speak up to challenge what is discernibly wrong.
And there's other female athletes that are refusing to speak up, keeping their head down, and I think it's because they're trying to exploit the system.
And I'll put it this way.
I know for a fact there are females who are competing with males who are angry about it, but do these public statements like, I'm totally fine with it because they think if I speak up I'll lose money.
That's really what it is.
And they're like, I would rather have what little money I get than actually challenge this wrong.
Now that is wrong.
That can't remain.
So I'll leave it there.
You know, really excited to see that Bethany Hamilton is speaking out.
The night is always darkest before the dawn.
Before the dawn.
That's what I think Jack Pasovic said.
So good things seem to be coming.
More and more people are speaking out.
Bill Maher had a great segment calling out wokeness, so... We'll see.
We'll see.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes.
Stick around and I'll see you all shortly.
Once again, Libs of TikTok has blessed us with a cringe video of a young woman talking about fascism and property and just getting it all wrong, getting it all wrong.
And I think this is something that you should see because it allows us to understand the minds of these people who have an extremist ideology that will lead to death, suffering and destruction.
And I would like to point out the holes in this ideology to explain for you why socialism is bad.
No, individual responsibility is not fascism.
In fact, it's quite the opposite of what fascism is supposed to represent.
But before I just go off rambling about fascism-communism, let me show you a woman who says that people should not have private property while complaining that she once lived in a tent.
Lady, do you not understand?
Living in an apartment is private property?
Okay, okay, let me just play the video and be warned, she swears a whole lot.
Alright, here we go.
I don't know, in case your kids are listening or something.
unidentified
This time last year I was, in fact, living in a tent and it's been a wild fucking ride from there to now because, you know, tomorrow I move into the home that I fucking own, right?
Which is wild to me as well because I genuinely, and this is, I think people don't really get this, but I genuinely believe the shit that I say.
This lady clearly has no idea what that means, but I can respect that she said she's moving into a house that she owns, which is kind of shocking to her because she wants to eliminate private property.
And it's a line socialists say all the time in order to convince you that there is some distinction between private property and personal property, but personal property quite literally is private property.
Okay?
Now, what she may be trying to say is private property referring to land ownership, whereas personal property refers to me having glass bottles.
I like pointing out my glass bottles, by the way.
It's still nonsense because it's all rooted in the same thing.
There... You know what?
Let me just explain it this way.
Lady, you're buying a house, right?
Do you know what would happen if you did not own that house?
You see all those homeless people out there on the street?
They would also own your house.
And you would all live in that same house together.
And there's not enough houses for everybody.
Now, they can come out and scream all they want that there are enough houses for everybody because they do this lie where they're like, did you know that for every ten hou- like every one homeless person there's ten empty houses owned and real estate and blah blah blah and it's like... Maybe true.
Many of these houses that they bring up in these statistics are in disrepair, and you can't put human beings inside of.
In Detroit and Michigan, there are many houses that are unoccupied.
Good luck!
You can't put people in them.
We're doing a lot of construction work.
Domestin and there was an 1800s old barn house built on the property that had
been abandoned for 20 years and it's going to cost us around $100,000 to make
it livable. You could sit inside the building if you wanted but you'd
probably die from all the chemical garbage and animal like you'd probably
get rabies. There are holes in the walls like it was it was borderline condemned.
It wasn't condemned but it was like yo 20 years of neglect is not habitable by
a human being. We were warned like there's mold, there's dust, and
there's there's animal bits and like you can't breathe the air in here.
It's not ventilated, so when things go in there and die over 20 years, it stays.
You can't take homeless people and just put them in there.
Okay, let's slow down.
Okay, so expensive.
This means human beings have to come and do the work to make the building livable.
She's pointing to a post that says, If you can't afford to pay rent, go live in a tent at the park.
Landlords don't owe you a roof over your head if you can't afford rent.
Okay, let me explain something.
How the economy works.
We have challenges with massive population.
We really do.
How much does it cost to build a house?
Okay, you need the material costs, you need the land, you need, there's a lot of stuff you gotta do, you got excavation if you're doing a basement, concrete foundation, wood, materials, labor.
Labor's hefty.
Human beings have to do the work, you gotta pay them.
Now, if a human being can't afford $300,000 to build a house, perhaps it's a problem of the economy and it shouldn't cost that much.
Fine.
We can talk about that.
But if you can't afford it, you can't afford it.
What do we do?
Well, there's the idea of the socialists, that the government just get the materials and take them, but someone has to chop those trees down.
Someone has to process the lumber.
Someone has to work every level of this.
And when you say that the government will make you do it, it just means you're lowering the standard of living for everybody.
Here's ultimately how it comes down to.
I don't like massive landlord corporations.
Not the biggest fan.
I think there are problems with how the system works, for sure.
But, uh, being a property owner and having tenants, I can tell you this.
Typically, it ain't worth it.
I really don't think it's worth it.
I gotta be honest.
People make a business out of it, but what?
You gotta own dozens of properties before you're actually sustaining yourself, and then you have a massive corporation with tax filings with multiple LLCs and staff to maintain and manage all these buildings.
Guess what your rent pays for?
The maintenance and upkeep of the building you are not responsible for.
And people like this are like, it's fascism!
unidentified
That someone would own a building and then charge money for it.
Some people are very wealthy because they own a company and the company owns a thousand buildings.
And then they distribute the workload to other people and take a cut off the top.
Not a fan.
I don't like people who make money off money.
Just, that's, I never, I never, I want you to be personally responsible and I want you to pitch in.
And I can understand complaining about that.
Hey, guess what?
I'm center-left.
But this lady is completely wrong.
unidentified
This, what you've done, is called fascism.
And I know that that's a confusing term for some people, and I'm going to have a whole bunch of, you know, strawmans in the thing going, oh my god, that's a fascism, you're overreacting.
No, no, no.
In terms of economic theory, fascism is the genuine belief that individuals are responsible for their own well-being and welfare.
Okay, yeah, let's not talk about Planned Parenthood there.
But eugenics theories and white supremacy, when she's saying white supremacy, she's not talking about a Klan rally.
She's talking about, like, showing up to work on time.
She's talking about keeping schedules and saving money for the future.
I am not exaggerating.
The Smithsonian published this stuff.
When the left says white supremacy, they do not mean Klan rallies.
Hope you understand that.
unidentified
And pops up a lot in Christian movements.
It's really weird how all of these tools of colonization are dangerous for all of us and seem to keep popping up in the same sorts of groups over and over and over again who have historically made it their mission to make the lives of people of color fucking horrendous.
All right, let's talk about, I don't know, Japanese colonialism.
Let's talk about Chinese colonialism.
This is what I can't stand about these racists.
They think that only white people can do certain things.
This woman, I will explain, this woman is a white supremacist.
And I'm not being cute, and I'm not trying to be like, no, you're the white supremacist.
No, I mean this literally.
These are people, white liberals, who view white people as superior.
They argue against it, but they believe it.
That's why we call them white supremacists with guilty consciences.
She doesn't know anything about East Asia.
She doesn't want to talk about Southeast Asia.
She acts like these people don't exist.
As if I could not tell you stories about... Hey, here's a funny story.
In all my life, I knew that I was part Korean.
And then I found out, because of a DNA test, I'm actually part Japanese, too.
I wonder why that is.
Now, I'm not going to hold a grudge.
I think Japan's awesome.
Seriously.
I know more about Japan than I do about Korea.
Maybe my Korean ancestors are probably upset about that.
I've been to Seoul and I've been to Japan.
I think both places are absolutely awesome.
Seoul was just amazing.
But come on.
You want to talk about why I have some Japanese DNA?
5% actually.
You know why?
Yeah.
Okay.
You get it.
Yeah, it wasn't because they were holding hands and singing under the starlight.
Quite the opposite.
So this is what really frustrates me, knowing my history and where I come from, and then hearing these white liberal, I mean these women, I don't know where she's from, she's got an accent, maybe she's British or whatever, act like it's always the same group of Christians, yeah these are like Buddhists or something, I don't know what religion they had in Japan, when they decided to go rampaging and marauding, and the Japanese Empire, everything they did in World War II, It's as if, like, why is it only ever this one group of people who are doing these things?
And it's like, lady, it's not.
It's not.
I mean, Shaka Zulu was a warlord.
Fierce AF.
Not a good dude by today's moral standards.
And you look at Boko Haram.
You look at these groups in Africa.
Spare me your lecturing.
There are bad white people.
I think, honestly, Antifa, these white lunatic terrorists, they're part of it.
Read a book and travel the world and stop thinking that it's only white people like you who have the power to do these things.
It's not true.
I wanted to argue with a guy who told me that white people brought the concept of time to China.
And I was like, are you kidding me, dude?
White supremacists.
This lady, where are you going?
That way.
That lady.
I had to tell a guy.
Yo, my guy.
China invented the compass 1,000 years before white people.
And I'm not going to sit here and tell you that either group is better or worse or more capable or less capable because we're all people.
And I believe there may be some differences.
Like when I went to Thailand, everybody was shorter than me.
When I went to Sweden, everyone was taller.
But I believe ultimately culture and nurture play the biggest role in how a person will behave and how things develop.
But all humans are capable of all things.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes.
Stick around.
I saw this clip posted by Elijah Schaeffer.
It's called, Naivety vs. Reality.
It's this guy, what is it, King Cringe on TikTok, asks a woman if he thinks that men and women can be friends, and she says yes, and then she's surprised to find out that the random guy friend that she asked about taking a look at her butt was like, yes, in fact, I would like to see it.
And so she's like, I can't believe it.
Why would a guy do this?
Alright, I kind of feel like back in the day, like, okay, I know I've been saying this non-stop that I watched 1883, but like, just to bring it up again, he says to the dude who wants to marry his daughter, if you get handsy with her, you know what I mean, like, And, uh, I think it used to be known that, like, guys are guys, men are from Mars, women are from Venus, and all that stuff, right?
And so, I don't know what's happening now, but I'll put it this way.
And it may not make complete sense, but let me explain it this way.
I grew up in a world watching cartoons where, in superhero shows, the male and female characters fight on even footing.
As if they were the same.
The male and the female characters in the same role.
And as I got older, I realized that's just literally not true, and that's not how it works.
I mean, if you pay attention to any level of sporting at all, you'd realize this is fantasy.
And I'm not trying to be a dick and say women aren't capable, I'm saying, like, watching a superhero show where, like, Wonder Woman is fighting Batman or something for some reason because she's under mind control and, like, but she's got superpowers, so that explains it.
You see shows like this, or you'll see like in anime and manga and other comic books, there will be a female- Black Widow, for instance, right?
Female femme fatale assassin, no superpowers, fighting toe-to-toe with Hawkeye, and it's like, wow, they're both really good, but you know, like, while it certainly is possible there's gonna be a very high-level female that's better than a lower-level male, if you're talking about two cream-of-the-crop, top-of-the-top, best-of-the-best physical fighters, 99 times out of 100, dude's gonna win.
Joe Rogan points out that, like, grappling matches are different and women can win with grappling.
So, fair point, Black Widow.
Maybe she can beat Hawkeye.
But anyway, let me play for you this clip and then we'll talk about it.
We'll talk about it.
unidentified
Do you think it's possible to have guy friends when you're in a relationship?
I think it's possible, yes.
Now why is that?
I don't think my guy friends want anything more than just being friends.
I feel like you go back in time, like you watch these old movies
and you watch TV shows from back in the day and everybody kind of understood
that there were these like heavy physical distinctions Now maybe now things are a bit different, not just in the social landscape, but in the endocrine disruptor landscape, and you're getting a lot more effeminate men.
But I just gotta say, like 99% of the time, Right?
Men have a different view of social interactions than women.
And it's crazy to me because you get to a certain age and it's supposed to become obvious, right?
That's why there's that meme where it's like, men only want one thing.
It's like, well, yeah.
Guys are object-oriented, and ladies are subject-oriented, on average.
Not every single person.
Or at least, that's what we tend to see when we look for patterns.
That is to say, a guy's gonna be very focused on skateboarding, right?
I gotta land this kickflip.
It's for myself, it makes me feel good.
Part of it is competition with other men.
But women, Or more socially driven.
So what we see in terms of social media, a best example of this is if you go to Instagram.
A guy, man, you know what?
I gotta call out, not a negative call out, but I gotta bring it up.
Leticia Buffoni.
Do you know who she is?
She's a famous female pro skateboarder.
So, I'm watching skate videos, and homie's at the Hollywood High 16 set, and he's straight up like, dude, I am going to switch, what is switch back Smith down this 16 stair handrail.
Don't worry about the complicated explanation.
The guy is going to ride his board backwards and then jump the opposite way onto a railing and slide down it with a... It's relatively difficult and very large and scary.
He's doing a big trick.
When they film it, you see the guy do the trick.
It is somewhat subject-oriented, but it is the object that is the accomplishment of the technical process.
To do the thing.
There is a human, because we care about humans, but the video matter is, this is the 16 stairs with the railing, and he slid down it.
That whole imagery is what it is.
Letizia Buffoni filmed Nyjah Houston, another pro, doing a grind down a railing, sliding down the railing, and, like, I don't say she does this all the time, but she holds the camera in front of her face, following her face as he does the grind, and I thought it was funny, because there's that meme where it's, like, men taking a photo of something, and it's a picture of the object, and it's, like, women taking a picture of something, and it's the women's face over the object, so you can barely see it, and it's kinda like, Yeah.
Yeah, there's a pattern there.
Now, I know there's probably some women who are annoyed by that because they don't want to be that way or they don't want to be viewed that way.
I'm not saying all women.
I'm saying there tends to be a pattern in this.
If you go on Instagram, you will see women post selfies all the time.
Guys don't do it as much.
Don't ask me why.
I don't know.
That's just the way it is.
But to see a video like this, I'm wondering.
I'm wondering because since I've been a kid, It's been kind of obvious when you listen to adults that men only want one thing.
I know not every single guy, because many guys don't want to be viewed that way either.
But there's also been this persistent trope of naivety among women, not just today, but even going back to when I was a kid, where they were like, no, we're just friends.
And it's like, come on, dude.
Guys like girls for their bodies.
That's the thing.
Not all guys, not all the time.
I do think men and women can be friends because I have tons of friends that are female and I have no interest in them.
I'm just saying that for young women, it's just you're going to find probably what like 80% of the time the dude is just like, I am looking for a mate.
And this is the crazy thing to me about when it comes to friend zoning.
Men get mad about being friend zoned.
And then women started complaining about being, what do they call it, girlfriend zoned.
And so the idea was guys have this trope where, I shouldn't say guys, but there's a trope
of when a woman says, let's just be friend, friends, they've put the guy in a friend zone
and they will never date.
And the friend zone is viewed as one ladder, and then there's like, the boyfriend zone is another ladder, and then like, I remember someone made an analogy where it's like, if you climb to the top of that ladder, you can try to jump from the friend zone to the boyfriend zone, but you fall in the process and make it to the bottom of the ladder, so it's like, a struggle.
But the friend zone resulted in a bunch of women complaining, being like, friend zone?
As if there's something wrong with being friends.
Well, they're putting me in the girlfriend zone.
They're demanding of me something, and it's like, yes, relationships are mutual.
So I've always viewed it this way, like, if you're a guy, and you're romantically and physically interested in a woman, but she only wants to be friends, I think the reality is you should not be friends or boyfriend or girlfriend.
End of story.
You're not compatible.
It's not a question of the guy being right or the woman being right.
Women are like, don't girlfriend zone me.
What's wrong with just being friends?
Well, to the women who are friends with a guy and then complain that he wants more, you're not taking into consideration what the guy is feeling.
You cannot be friends with someone who is romantically interested in you to a large degree.
There are exceptions to the rule, obviously, but it's because this guy will be emotionally Suffering, to some degree, be it only a little bit or maybe greatly.
So it's just an incompatibility.
And then you know when you're hanging out, this guy really just wants to be with you.
And for the guy, you know she doesn't.
So how about this?
Friend zone, girlfriend zone, none of it matters.
Incompatible.
Man attracted to woman, woman not.
Woman attracted to man, man not.
Don't be friends.
Because you both are looking for something in a relationship you're not going to get.
Now, I'm not here to be Mr. Relationship Advice or anything like that.
I'm just saying, a relationship has to be mutual.
Be it friends, business, or a significant other.
I like, if you got a guy who's only, he comes to meet with you at your business, cause he's trying to sell you watches.
And you're like, look man, I appreciate the watches, but I think we should just be friends and watch TV.
He's gonna be like, okay, like that's weird.
I don't know you, I don't care about you, I wanna sell watches to you.
I want a business relationship.
Imagine there were two guys, and one guy was like, look man, the only thing I really care, I think your hobbies suck, I think you're arrogant, I think you're an a-hole, but, We do play cards and it is fun.
I don't want to do anything else.
And you're like, oh, but I want to go fishing.
I don't want to go fishing with you.
Why would you be like, you're, you're poker zoning me because you only want to play card games, but you won't go.
If two people cannot mutually agree on what the relationship is supposed to be, then it shouldn't exist.
Now, I think for the most part, most guys are willing to, you know, keep the field open.
And this is what we're seeing here in this video.
A guy would be like, you know, a good guy.
Of course a guy's gonna wanna hook up with a chick.
But he might just be like, eh, we're just friends, you know.
But given the opportunity, he would gladly launch to the next level.
Like we see in this video.
Women, probably, in most cases, or at least we assume, don't operate that way.
And aren't interested in it.
I just think that makes total sense.
Women are called the gatekeepers of sex.
Meaning, at any point a woman decides she wants to, well then it's probably gonna happen.
And in this case, the woman clearly doesn't want to.
She's just friends with these guys, but the guys are all ready and waiting.
